Tufts University Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Boston, MA, USA.
Tufts University School of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Adv Nutr. 2021 Feb 1;12(1):71-88. doi: 10.1093/advances/nmaa097.
Understanding the health effects of protein intake is bedeviled by a number of factors, including protein quality and source. In addition, different units, including grams, grams per kilogram body weight (g/kg BW), and percent energy, may contribute to confusion about protein's effects on health, especially BW-based units in increasingly obese populations. We aimed to review the literature and to conduct a modeling demonstration of various units of protein intake in relation to markers of cardiometabolic health. Data from the Framingham Heart Study Offspring (n = 1847; 60.3 y; 62.5% women) and Third Generation (n = 2548; 46.2 y; 55.3% women) cohorts and the NHANES 2003-04 (n = 1625; 46.2 y; 49.7% women) and 2005-06 (n = 1347; 43.7 y; 49.5% women) cycles were used to model cross-sectional associations between 7 protein units (grams, percent energy, g/kg ideal BW, g/kg actual BW, BW-adjusted g/kg actual BW, g/kg lean BW, and g/kg fat-free BW) and 9 cardiometabolic outcomes (fasting glucose, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, total and HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, BMI, waist circumference, and estimated glomerular filtration rate). The literature review indicated the use of myriad units of protein intake, with differential results on cardiometabolic outcomes. The modeling demonstration showed units expressed in BW were confounded by BW, irrespective of outcome. Units expressed in grams, percent energy, and ideal BW showed similar results, with or without adjustment for body size. After adjusting for BW, results of units expressed in BW aligned with results of grams, percent energy, and ideal BW. In conclusion, protein intake in cardiometabolic health appears to depend on protein's unit of expression. Authors should be specific about the use of WHO (g/kg ideal BW) compared with US (g/kg actual BW) units, and ideally use gram or percent energy in observational studies. In populations where overweight/obesity are prevalent, intake based on actual BW should be reevaluated.
了解蛋白质摄入对健康的影响受到许多因素的困扰,包括蛋白质的质量和来源。此外,不同的单位,包括克、每公斤体重的克数(g/kg BW)和能量百分比,可能会导致人们对蛋白质对健康的影响产生混淆,尤其是在超重/肥胖人群中,基于 BW 的单位更是如此。我们旨在回顾文献,并对各种蛋白质摄入量单位与心血管代谢健康标志物的关系进行建模演示。研究数据来自弗雷明汉心脏研究后代队列(n=1847;60.3 岁;62.5%为女性)和第三代队列(n=2548;46.2 岁;55.3%为女性)以及 NHANES 2003-04 周期(n=1625;46.2 岁;49.7%为女性)和 2005-06 周期(n=1347;43.7 岁;49.5%为女性),用于对 7 种蛋白质单位(克、能量百分比、理想 BW 每公斤的克数、实际 BW 每公斤的克数、实际 BW 每公斤 BW 的调整克数、瘦体重每公斤的克数和无脂肪 BW 每公斤的克数)与 9 种心血管代谢结局(空腹血糖、收缩压和舒张压、总胆固醇和高密度脂蛋白胆固醇、甘油三酯、BMI、腰围和估计肾小球滤过率)之间的横断面关联进行建模。文献回顾表明,使用了多种蛋白质摄入量单位,对心血管代谢结局的影响也不同。建模演示表明,无论结果如何,用 BW 表示的单位都与 BW 有关。用克、能量百分比和理想 BW 表示的单位显示出相似的结果,无论是否调整体型大小。在调整 BW 后,用 BW 表示的单位的结果与克、能量百分比和理想 BW 的结果一致。总之,心血管代谢健康中的蛋白质摄入似乎取决于蛋白质的表达单位。作者应该具体说明与美国(g/kg BW)相比,世卫组织(g/kg 理想 BW)单位的使用情况,并且在观察性研究中最好使用克或能量百分比。在超重/肥胖人群中,应重新评估基于实际 BW 的摄入量。